Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:iAnonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Serious question. Why would an alumn give money to his/her school if there is no way it will help your child even in some small way don’t the road? Isn’t this going to kill alumni giving?.
Plus how can the state mandate what private schools do?
I only have to my Alma mater in hopes of my kids getting admitted. Otherwise I’d rather donate to help local kids get thru hs and into college, not help an elite university with funding
California underwrites need based scholarships for instate students - they can pull that funding.
Pell grant funding? Please explain. If so, it’s less than it’s ever been. USC has a robust endowment.
If USC has such a robust endowment then legacy donations really shouldn't matter.
Plus, it's a bad look for USC and Stanford, in a very liberal state.
I guess conservatives care about elitism and hoarding opportunities.
I think it's good for USC's reputation. They have spent several decades now trying to boost their academic reputation for undergraduates. They have mostly succeeded. People are less likely to think of it as the university of spoiled children. It has come a long way. This will help strengthen their reputation in the long run.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Serious question. Why would an alumn give money to his/her school if there is no way it will help your child even in some small way don’t the road? Isn’t this going to kill alumni giving?.
Yes
Anonymous wrote:Our family is not a big donor, so really no skin in the game. That said, is any one concerned states are overreaching into private schools?
How can a state mandate a private universities admissions process? What’s next? Making private universities be non-religious? Or making sure a private school accepts so many first gen students?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:iAnonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Serious question. Why would an alumn give money to his/her school if there is no way it will help your child even in some small way don’t the road? Isn’t this going to kill alumni giving?.
Plus how can the state mandate what private schools do?
I only have to my Alma mater in hopes of my kids getting admitted. Otherwise I’d rather donate to help local kids get thru hs and into college, not help an elite university with funding
California underwrites need based scholarships for instate students - they can pull that funding.
Pell grant funding? Please explain. If so, it’s less than it’s ever been. USC has a robust endowment.
If USC has such a robust endowment then legacy donations really shouldn't matter.
Plus, it's a bad look for USC and Stanford, in a very liberal state.
I guess conservatives care about elitism and hoarding opportunities.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think this is great.
Even if this gets appealed down the line, it is now against the zeitgeist to have legacy admissions. Tide is turning and will turn elsewhere too.
Now that there have been more diverse admissions for decades, legacy doesn’t carry the weight anymore.
Admissions have all the tools to identify connected families, from expensive sports to social networks, that relying on “legacy” isn’t even needed anymore.
Read up on how they started promoting athletics when Jewish students started earning admissions on academic achievement.
Anonymous wrote:Our family is not a big donor, so really no skin in the game. That said, is any one concerned states are overreaching into private schools?
How can a state mandate a private universities admissions process? What’s next? Making private universities be non-religious? Or making sure a private school accepts so many first gen students?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Glad my kid's first choice/legacy school is in a red state. Doubt legacy admissions will ever be banned there and the school has already doubled down and announced that legacy admissions are staying.
Doesn't seem very christian.
Anonymous wrote:Glad my kid's first choice/legacy school is in a red state. Doubt legacy admissions will ever be banned there and the school has already doubled down and announced that legacy admissions are staying.
Anonymous wrote:Our family is not a big donor, so really no skin in the game. That said, is any one concerned states are overreaching into private schools?
How can a state mandate a private universities admissions process? What’s next? Making private universities be non-religious? Or making sure a private school accepts so many first gen students?
Anonymous wrote:Our family is not a big donor, so really no skin in the game. That said, is any one concerned states are overreaching into private schools?
How can a state mandate a private universities admissions process? What’s next? Making private universities be non-religious? Or making sure a private school accepts so many first gen students?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think this is great.
Even if this gets appealed down the line, it is now against the zeitgeist to have legacy admissions. Tide is turning and will turn elsewhere too.
Now that there have been more diverse admissions for decades, legacy doesn’t carry the weight anymore.
Admissions have all the tools to identify connected families, from expensive sports to social networks, that relying on “legacy” isn’t even needed anymore.
Read up on how they started promoting athletics when Jewish students started earning admissions on academic achievement.